Hope the Devs read this, I know we are supposed to be getting preferred maps option, but that may be months away, due to balance of population and consistency.
What if every selects Tunisia because that map seems to be so low in current MM queues I never see it, maybe 1 -2 / 20 games, maybe less!
I have created a near full low tier Italian lineup (best I have without M13(have but crap), Radio Ops), just in case I get to fight there.
Either release and tweak preferred maps soon as this is what your vets are missing (lots of people get annoyed when a different map pops up, than what they want) and re-tweak later OR look at specific vehicles, squads and increase their likelihood of getting Tunisia (can apply to others too - crusaders - Tunisia).
This can be broadly applied to all Enlisted maps / campaigns but perhaps use Tunisia as test bed?
Feel free to discuss below, let’s try and be nice to each other
The weapons and vehicles are already all over the place that there is no point in any sort of “preference” unless this game was restructured historically/ chronologically accurate
Because the pop and one sided games overruled, I know the pop has certainly increased since then, although BR system works, I think PMaps option has been tweaked, hence not released yet, so will be better.
The new players and vets want to have more choice of maps they are playing on, I have an Italian BR2 line up with I have customized for when I get Normandy Bulge and Moscow, but if I could chose Tunisia not Normandy, or Normandy not Pacific not sure how it would work, I might get to fight where I wanted.
Sorry I disagree, then the game is just like BFV, 2042, I like the low, mid and high tier (BR4) matches, technically you can bring all the low tier into a BR5 providing you have a weapon of that tier.
But no I don’t want KT2 in Moscow or Tunisia, but then again with preferred maps option or vehicle association it could be tweaked for people who want br4 high tier in Tunisia for example.
It is all about the pop and MM+/- soft rule worked so why not preferred maps. If enough players are the timewant high tier Moscow or Tunisia and there is a similar amount of players on opposing side, why not.
Because the proposed sytem was hot garbage?
Or how do you defend equipment like that?
A single squad made all of your careful deck building pointless.
Not sure why anybody would want that system…
The proposed system was nowhere near functional unlike how many wants to remember it to have worked.
Or just look as the competetor for the P 47 in normandy.
Do I need to say more?
Edit:
Even that the way equipment was set up it items largely where just in 2 diffrent pool AKA high BR and low BR and not this gun goes to moscow and this to tunisia. Which then again would be utterly crushed by your handheld AT options overridding your prefered map.
I don’t see your point. The StuG can appear in every single campaign, so you’re free to add it into whatever build you want without any conflicts
“Guys look a biplane can possibly appear in Normandy! Haha P47 competitor!”
Just use a different plane that can also appear in Normandy. Problem solved. Plenty of Bf’s and Fw’s around to use
…so you build a load out that can only appear on one campaign, via abusing the preferences and “will never appear on” system, and then add the StuG and not have an issue
People want to play a specific map with the prefered sytem. That was the main appeal and why it was proposed but due to the way MM was set up there was little protecting someone from end game gear
as even a bolt action rifle sent you into that hellscape that was normandy.
Equip a single gewehr 33/40 ?
Have fun competing with M2 carbine spam.
Why do they “need” protection? Why do we need to coddle everyone?
If the gun was present in that battlefield, it should be there
If it wasn’t then it shouldn’t (Volksturm in Tunisia)
